[__ Science __ ] Noahs Flood explained and Evolution refuted.

[Barbarian]

Thus kindness is just sex. Isn’t this what evolution reduces kindness and generosity to? They reduce altruism to just a “fitness benefit,” i.e., some trait that helps you pass on your genes.

There is a fitness benefit to altruism. Kindness to your friends and family will generally be reciprocated, which is to your benefit. Jesus' great revelation to man was that the answer to "who is my neighbor" is "everyone."

The point to the Good Samaritan was not merely "it's good to help those in need"; it was Jesus telling His people that it's better to emulate a heretic who loves and cares for all people, than to be like a religiously-correct Levite who does not.

 

[Barbarian]

William Dembski discusses the Maxwell Demon paradox from an information-conservation viewpoint in his recent book No Free Lunch.
" (white text in this quote is linked)

Sounds interesting. Name us one process, required for evolution, that is prohibited by thermodynamics or "information-conservation." What do you have?

 

[Barbarian]

Were dinosaurs able to mock humans ? Like a Mocking bird or Myna bird , etc .

Fossil evidence suggests that bird-like dinosaurs (at least) had a syrinx, which is the vocal organ of birds. So it seems that at least some other dinosaurs could.

 

[KV-44-v1]

Your guy has completely lost sight of God's message in scripture and wants to downgrade it to a science textbook. How sad.

It's not JUST

1. a message,
2. not JUST science, or history, etc, but
ITS BOTH!

God's way,

Do you truly believe God's Way is by using ....

.... "death and suffering over millions of years?"

the way that seems right to him

Evolutionary tinkering and genetic mistakes is the creation method that seems right to Barb.

There is grandeur in this view of life, with its several powers, having been originally breathed by the Creator into a few forms or into one

Darwin gave no Bible verses to prove that family-to-family evolution was true.

What is he saying were 'breathed by the Creator'? That view of life? The several powers? Life? Clarification needed.

we can't really find any apomorphic characters to distinguish birds from other dinosaurs.

does THIS

look like THIS?

Looks pretty different, wouldn't you say?

Mabye youll state that i'm ""interpreting"" the images ""too literally"", theyre ""JUST an alligery""!!

 

[KV-44-v1]

Sounds interesting. Name us one process, required for evolution, that is prohibited by thermodynamics or "information-conservation." What do you have?

Whichever genes are creating the "arms" that never existed in the dna are impossible, for instance.
Like a snake populations dna gaining the info for , say, arms, all by itself (no intervention by God or by man), over 500 (or ANY number) generations of arm-evolving snakes.

 

[KV-44-v1]

Thus kindness is just sex. Isn’t this what evolution reduces kindness and generosity to? They reduce altruism to just a “fitness benefit,” i.e., some trait that helps you pass on your genes. This is not only dumb, it’s ugly. It sweeps away any truly unselfish actions based on morality, and colors it as purposeless survival of the fittest. It is grunge reductionism, turning the beautiful into the raw, throwing mud on the bridal gown. Recall how the PBS Evolution TV series portrayed evolution: over images of an Apollo rocket launch and a choir singing the Hallelujah Chorus, the narrator claimed that all human activity, however sublime, stems from our inherent urge to reproduce. This is reductionism at its most absurd.

It’s also junk science. The students signed up to play a game, and were getting paid! How do their actions in this staged setting have anything to do with real life? Do you play Monopoly the same way you operate your daily affairs? I’ve see the gentlest preacher’s wife take great glee in loading Boardwalk with hotels and stomping her competitors out of business in Monopoly, who in real life is the kindest and most unselfish, hard working person you could know. These scientists also failed to demonstrate that their conclusions were not Lamarckian, and that somehow the most altruistic would actually cause genetic changes, or would help the population pass on improved genes. Evolutionists have this kinky idea that human beings are just lab rats under forces of mindless evolution with nothing but sex on their minds, and that somehow an experiment like this tells them something about how human behavior evolved.

These scientists have way too much time on their hands. Here’s how they should learn about altruism. They should go visit a widow in a nursing home and show genuine kindness to her, listen to her tell about her life, and meet her physical needs. They should visit a disabled child or orphan, or adopt one from a totalitarian country, someone that has no hope of passing on his genes, and give him encouragement and love and hope of a better life. They should join the fight against evil and suffering and unbridled lust and selfishness in the world. Enough of this nonsense about altruism being an evolutionary game played by selfish genes.

The Epistle of James in the New Testament presents a very different, un-Darwinian view of altruism, as does all the Word of God. Altruism is not a game played for the advantage of the individual, the group, or the genes; it is human behavior nearest to the image of Jesus Christ, the most altruistic of all, who gave His life for the very, very unfit.

You mightve missed this part.

 

[KV-44-v1]

emulate a heretic who

Ahhh, so that's the- or a- reason why you seek common worldview ground with the World's view of origins (evolution and millions years) and prefer to ""juggle"" the Bible and naturalism at the same time. Ok.

Yes/no: Do you believe that it is "caring" to share the origins beliefs that nonbelievers have? (ie, family2family evo and million years)

Sounds interesting. Name us one process, required for evolution, that is prohibited by thermodynamics or "information-conservation." What do you have?

The fact nobody, NOBODY has seen any reptile populations over ANY SPAN of time create birds. Guesses but no observations.

I'd like to see reptiles in a closed, sealed lab reproduce for millions of years giving rise to birds. That won't happen, because the Bible is right.

 

[Barbarian]

There is a fitness benefit to altruism. Kindness to your friends and family will generally be reciprocated, which is to your benefit. Jesus' great revelation to man was that the answer to "who is my neighbor" is "everyone."

The point to the Good Samaritan was not merely "it's good to help those in need"; it was Jesus telling His people that it's better to emulate a heretic who loves and cares for all people, than to be like a religiously-correct Levite who does not.

Ahhh, so that's the- or a- reason why you seek common worldview ground with the World's view of origins

I can only accept that Jesus is right. You should, too. Since the world is God's creation, it can't contradict His word. And it doesn't. It contradicts the revisions of Genesis by YE creationists. But that's a different issue. But to update the parable, it would be better to emulate a YE creationist who loves and cares for all people, than to be like a Biblical Christian who does not.

Yes/no: Do you believe that it is "caring" to share the origins beliefs that nonbelievers have?

I don't regard YE creationists as "nonbelievers." It is caring to extend help to all who are need, even if they don't share our beliefs, and it's what matters to our salvation. That is the message of the Good Samaritan.

YE is not a heresy, BTW.
Sounds interesting. Name us one process, required for evolution, that is prohibited by thermodynamics or "information-conservation." What do you have?

The fact nobody, NOBODY has seen any reptile populations over ANY SPAN of time create birds.

You were going to show us how thermodynamics or "information conservation" ruled out a process required for evolution. So nothing but "if it takes too long for humans to observe, it must be impossible"? Do you now see why so few scientists and informed Christians take YE seriously?

I'd like to see reptiles in a closed, sealed lab reproduce for millions of years giving rise to birds.

As your fellow YE creationist, Dr. Kurt Wise admits:
Evidences for Darwin’s second expectation — of stratomorphic intermediate species —include such species as Baragwanathia27(between rhyniophytes and lycopods), Pikaia28 (between echinoderms and chordates), Purgatorius29 (between the tree shrews and the primates), and Proconsul30 (between the non-hominoid primates and the hominoids). Darwin’s third expectation —of higher-taxon stratomorphic intermediates — has been confirmed by such examples as the mammal-like reptile groups31 between the reptiles and the mammals,and the phenacodontids32 between the horses and their presumed ancestors. Darwin’s fourth expectation — of stratomorphic series— has been confirmed by such examples as the early bird series,33the tetrapod series,34,35 the whale series,36 the various mammal series of the Cenozoic37 (for example, the horse series, the camel series, the elephant series, the pig series, the titanothere series,etc.), the Cantius and Plesiadapus primate series,38 and the hominid series.39 Evidence for not just one but for all three of the species level and above types of stratomorphic intermediates expected by macroevolutionary theory is surely strong evidence for macroevolutionary theory.
YE creationist Dr. Kurt Wise, Toward a Creationist Understanding of Transitional Forms

 

[Barbarian]

You mightve missed this part.

It's not just about sex. Even the most sexually-obsessed scientist wouldn't say so. For example, (as Darwin pointed out in The Descent of Man) caring for unrelated children in one's tribe would have nothing whatever to do with sex, but would have a selective advantage for survival. Your guy just didn't get that altruism is a valuable trait in any social species. As Arnold Toynbee wrote, Jesus extended that concept to all of humankind and cut through the "death spiral of harm and revenge."

Like most of God's rules for us, they aren't arbitrary commands, but reasonable rules that lead to greater good for us in this world as in the next. Altruism has a selective value. Why wouldn't it? Your author is way too focused on sex and not enough on the Good Samaritan.

 

[Barbarian]

Your guy has completely lost sight of God's message in scripture and wants to downgrade it to a science textbook. How sad.

t's not JUST

1. a message,
2. not JUST science, or history, etc, but
ITS BOTH!

No. It's not. There's no science in it. Can you learn about God from His creation? Of course you can:

Romans 1:20 For the invisible things of him, from the creation of the world, are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made; his eternal power also, and divinity: so that they are inexcusable.
"From the invisible things of Him" Not science, but a mind attuned to God. If your faith can't do this, science can't help you.

Do you truly believe God's Way is by using death and suffering over millions of years?

God could have made world with no death and suffering. He is omnipotent and eternal. No one and nothing can make him do or even allow anything He does not want. I don't second-guess Him. No one should.

Evolutionary tinkering and genetic mistakes is the creation method that seems right to Barb.

Well, that's the big thing here. Engineers are now copying evolutionary processes to solve problems that are too difficult for design. These "genetic algorithms" use random variation and natural selection to more efficiently solve complicated problems.

Optimization of automotive diesel engine calibration using genetic algorithm techniques

Although the advancements in automotive diesel engines in the last two decades have resulted in the possibility of achieving better performance with l…

www.sciencedirect.com

Once again, God knew best. We shouldn't be surprised.

 

[Barbarian]

Darwin wrote:
There is grandeur in this view of life, with its several powers, having been originally breathed by the Creator into a few forms or into one

Darwin gave no Bible verses to prove that family-to-family evolution was true.

Newton gave no Bible verses to prove that gravitation was true. For the same reason.

Point being, we can't really find any apomorphic characters to distinguish birds from other dinosaurs.

does THIS

Look like this?

Yeah, kinda does. The second is a bird-like dinosaur and the first is a bird. But as you seem to now realize, there are no apomorphic characters in birds that can't be found in other dinosaurs. Since you've declined to name even one, I think we're done here.

Mabye youll state that i'm ""interpreting"" the images ""too literally""

I'm just showing you the evidence. As you see, dinosaurs were a pretty varied lot. But birds really have no evolutionary novelties not found in other dinosaurs.

 

[Barbarian]

Sounds interesting. Name us one process, required for evolution, that is prohibited by thermodynamics or "information-conservation." What do you have?

Like a snake populations dna gaining the info for , say, arms, all by itself (no intervention by God or by man), over 500 (or ANY number) generations of arm-evolving snakes.

Snakes have genes for limbs. Some of them even retain vestigial limbs.
Burgess, D. Sonic snakes and regulation of limb formation.
Nat Rev Genet 17, 715 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1038/nrg.2016.149

Sonic snakes and regulation of limb formation - Nature Reviews Genetics

www.nature.com

SOUTH AFRICAN PYTHON Python sebae natalensis "claw" (vestigial leg Stock Photo - Alamy

Download this stock image: SOUTH AFRICAN PYTHON Python sebae natalensis claw (vestigial leg) - MFGTRY from Alamy's library of millions of high resolution stock photos, illustrations and vectors.

www.alamy.com

But you still can't show us even one process that is required for evolution, that is prohibited by thermodynamics or "information conservation." What's the hold-up?

 

[KV-44-v1]

I can only accept that Jesus is right. You should, too.

Already am, you seem to be asssuming i don't.

Since the world is God's creation, it can't contradict His word.

Family-to-family evolution aint the world, in any sense of "world". Planet earth or the majority of people.

John 15:19-21

The "world" I was referring to was not the Planet Earth. These John verse's aren't either. 'World' in my and John's context is "the majority of people" or "mainstream culture".

The world's way is OEE. The Biblical way gives YEC.

And it doesn't. It contradicts the revisions of Genesis by YE creationists. But that's a different issue. But to update the parable,

You'll have to specify which verses were "revised". As you may have learned, that's a pretty serious charge.
How can something supposedly "nonfactual" as Genesis (you believe it's allegory) contradict anything at all? Are you implying Genesis isn't allegory after all?

it would be better to emulate a YE creationist who loves and cares for all people, than to be like a Biblical Christian who does not.

Biblical Christian and YEC Christian are the same unless that YEC has compromised elsewhere, such as being a Unitarian. I regard unitarianism as compromise because the islamic god is a 1person god.

I put in "Christian" above, because there can be YEC muslims (wholl inevitably have a different view, not just the one detail of "earth young" ), etc. too.

Me: "Yes/no: Do you believe that it is "caring" to share the origins beliefs that nonbelievers have?"

I don't regard YE creationists as "nonbelievers."

In my self-quote, I was referring to "evolution and big bang" in "origins beliefs".
So you don't have a solid answer. You don't want to admit that OEE beliefs are simply compromise with Athiesm.

If your claims about "evolution is creation" were true, don't you think Athiests would be hating on evolution and organizations like AIG would defend it?

It is caring to extend help to all who are need, even if they don't share our beliefs, ........

Amen 100%

.. and it's what matters to our salvation

What are you saying is what matters?

YE is not a heresy, BTW.

Neither is OEE. OEE is simply a error.
Still waiting for how the datings are trustworthy in spite of all evidence otherwise. (like outside of shell being dated as older/younger than its inside!)

Sounds interesting. Name us one process, required for evolution, that is prohibited by thermodynamics or "information-conservation." What do you have?

Do you know any that are allowed?

So nothing but "if it takes too long for humans to observe, it must be impossible"?

This is neither YEC's only nor main argument.

Do you now see why so few scientists and informed Christians take YE seriously?

Because of Athiests, peer pressure, the school system, and the evolution-promoting, but Christ-less (wow big surprise!! not!) culture.

So few people, in general, take what the Bible says seriously. Not surprised they'd take the Bible's stance on origins and age lightly too.

John 15:19-21
19 If you were of the world, the world would love you as its own; but because you are not of the world, but I chose you out of the world, because of this the world hates you. 20 Remember the word that I said to you, ‘A slave is not greater than his master.’ If they persecuted Me, they will persecute you as well; if they followed My word, they will follow yours also. 21 But all these things they will do to you on account of My name, because they do not know the One who sent Me.

WorLdlines and Darwin or Wordliness and Jesus. Choose 1.

Snakes have genes for limbs. Some of them even retain vestigial limbs.

This is yet another "loss", you demonstrate exactly the opposite of what i asked. You showed no gain.
Genetic entropy stabs f2fe (Family-to Family Evolution) yet again!

I'll call it "f2fe" for short.

YEC 1 OEE 0.

PS: OEE means Old Earth Evolution. Belief in millions years universe+earth & belief in f2fe .

Even if those were "limbs", and not just grasping for straws/wishful thinking, the Bible is still superior to F2FE.
If there's any allegory here, it's F2FE, not Genesis.

But you still can't show us even one process that is required for evolution, that is prohibited by thermodynamics or "information conservation." What's the hold-up?

Can you show us three that are permitted?

Yeah, kinda does. The second is a bird-like dinosaur and the first is a bird. But as you seem to now realize, there are no apomorphic characters in birds that can't be found in other dinosaurs. Since you've declined to name even one, I think we're done here.

Ever seen any dinoes with REAL wings, and not just art?

And besides, that's clearly a bird and not a dino. Everyone who doesn't already think F2FE is legit knows that.

 

[KV-44-v1]

does THIS

look like THIS?

Looks pretty different, wouldn't you say?

Please do.

 

[KV-44-v1]

But as you seem to now realize, there are no apomorphic characters in birds that can't be found in other dinosaurs. Since you've declined to name even one, I think we're done here.

I have. Beaks, wings, and feathers. Filaments are not feathers, no matter how hard one stretches.

What about strong pectoral muscles demonstrably for flight?
""

1. Powered Flight: Birds are capable of powered flight, using their wings to generate lift and propel themselves through the air. Dinosaurs, on the other hand, were not capable of powered flight, although some may have had the ability to glide.
2. Endothermy (Warm-Blooded): Birds are endothermic, meaning they can regulate their own body temperature, unlike the ectothermic (cold-blooded) dinosaurs.
3. Egg-Laying: While both birds and dinosaurs lay eggs, the way they do so differs. Birds have a specialized reproductive system that allows them to lay eggs with hard, calcified shells, whereas dinosaur eggs had softer, leathery shells.
4. Beak: Birds have a beak, a specialized structure used for feeding, preening, and other functions. Dinosaurs had jaws with teeth, not a beak.
5. Respiratory System: Birds have a unique respiratory system with air sacs that allow for more efficient oxygen exchange, a feature not found in dinosaurs.
6. Metabolism: Birds have a higher metabolic rate compared to dinosaurs, which is necessary to support their active lifestyle and powered flight.
7. Parental Care: Many bird species exhibit complex parental care behaviors, such as nest building, incubation, and feeding of the young. Dinosaur parental care behaviors are less well-understood.
8. Social Behavior: Birds often exhibit complex social behaviors, such as flocking, courtship displays, and vocal communication, which may have been less developed in dinosaurs.
9. Adaptations for Flight: Birds have numerous anatomical and physiological adaptations that enable flight, such as lightweight bones, strong flight muscles, and specialized wing structures. Dinosaurs lacked these adaptations.
10. Crop and Gizzard: Birds have a crop, a specialized pouch in the esophagus used for storing food, and a gizzard, a muscular stomach that grinds food. Dinosaurs did not have these adaptations.
11. Preen Gland: Birds have a preen gland that secretes oils used for feather maintenance and waterproofing. Dinosaurs lacked this specialized gland.
12. Avian Immune System: The avian immune system is distinct from that of dinosaurs, with specialized features such as the bursa of Fabricius, which plays a crucial role in the development of the immune system.

""

 

[Barbarian]

But as you seem to now realize, there are no apomorphic characters in birds that can't be found in other dinosaurs. Since you've declined to name even one, I think we're done here.

I have. Beaks, wings, and feathers.

Many dinosaurs had beaks.

Lots of dinosaurs had wings. Archaeopteryx, Microraptor, etc. And these even had asymetrical flight feathers.

What about strong pectoral muscles demonstrably for flight?

Both Microraptor and Archaeopteryx could fly. And strong pectoral muscles are found in a good number of dinosaurs. Compsognathus even had a wishbone like birds, indicating large pectoral muscles needing a stronger attachment. And it didn't even fly.

Powered Flight: Birds are capable of powered flight, using their wings to generate lift and propel themselves through the air. Dinosaurs, on the other hand, were not capable of powered flight, although some may have had the ability to glide.

See above. There were flying dinosaurs. We know they could fly because they had asymetrical flight feathers.

Endothermy (Warm-Blooded): Birds are endothermic, meaning they can regulate their own body temperature, unlike the ectothermic (cold-blooded) dinosaurs.

Most, if not all dinosaurs were endothermic. That's why they originally had feathers. They needed to keep warm, unlike other reptiles. They had Haversian canals in their bones, like other endothermic animals.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1342937X20302252

It's likely that they weren't as endothermic as modern birds, probably like monotreme mammals. But the evicence is clear.

Egg-Laying: While both birds and dinosaurs lay eggs, the way they do so differs. Birds have a specialized reproductive system that allows them to lay eggs with hard, calcified shells, whereas dinosaur eggs had softer, leathery shells.

For a long time, all the dinosaur eggs known to scientists were hard-shelled. Recently, the eggs of a primitive dinosaur were found and were soft-shelled. But almost all dinosaurs had hard-shelled eggs when birds evolved.
The first dinosaur eggs had a soft shell, say paleontologists from Yale and the American Museum of Natural History (AMNH).

The finding upends decades of conventional wisdom by the scientific community. For many years there was scant fossil evidence of dinosaur eggs, and all known examples were characterized by thick, calcified shells — leading paleontologists to speculate that all dinosaur eggs were hard-shelled, like those of modern crocodiles and birds.

In a new study published in the journal Nature, researchers used a novel geochemical approach to show that the earliest dinosaur eggs had soft, leathery shells. Yale paleontologists Jasmina Wiemann and Matteo Fabbri are co-corresponding authors of the study, along with first author Mark Norell of AMNH.

Hard news: Early dinosaur eggs were soft, scientists say

New research shows that early dinosaur eggs had soft, leathery shells like modern turtles — quite unlike the bird egg-like hard shells of conventional wisdom.

news.yale.edu

Beak: Birds have a beak, a specialized structure used for feeding, preening, and other functions. Dinosaurs had jaws with teeth, not a beak.

See above.

Respiratory System: Birds have a unique respiratory system with air sacs that allow for more efficient oxygen exchange, a feature not found in dinosaurs.

Wrong again:

Birds and dinosaurs: High-performance breathing in bones ​

Origin of unique respiratory system of birds and dinosaurs​

Birds and dinosaurs: High-performance breathing in bones

Dinosaurs are far from 'extinct', but dominate as birds still most regions of the globe. Part of this huge success is due to the evolution of air sacs, which are crucial for the high efficiency of their respiratory system. Scientists have analyzed the structure of bones that are in contact with...

www.sciencedaily.com

Metabolism: Birds have a higher metabolic rate compared to dinosaurs, which is necessary to support their active lifestyle and powered flight.

See above. Microraptor did just that. And the bones and respiratory systems as well as the endothermy of those dinosaurs shows a high metabolic rate.

Parental Care: Many bird species exhibit complex parental care behaviors, such as nest building, incubation, and feeding of the young. Dinosaur parental care behaviors are less well-understood.

Your guy is a few years behind the curve...

Maiasaura - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Social Behavior: Birds often exhibit complex social behaviors, such as flocking, courtship displays, and vocal communication, which may have been less developed in dinosaurs.

"May have been?" Herd behavior in dinosaurs has been evident in fossils:
It should not come as a surprise that Deinonychus was a social animal, because many animals today are gregarious and form groups. Fossil evidence documents similar herding behaviour in a variety of dinosaurs. The mass assemblage in Bernissart, Belgium, for example, held at least three groups of Iguanodon. Group association and activity is also indicated by the dozens of Coelophysis skeletons of all ages recovered in New Mexico, U.S. The many specimens of Allosaurus at the Cleveland-Lloyd Quarry in Utah, U.S., may denote a herd of animals attracted to the site for the common purpose of scavenging. In the last two decades, several assemblages of ceratopsians and duckbills containing thousands of individuals have been found.

Dinosaur - Herding, Socialization, Adaptation | Britannica

Dinosaur - Herding, Socialization, Adaptation: Fossil evidence documents similar herding behavior in a variety of dinosaurs. Histological studies show that dinosaur skeletons grew quite rapidly. Different species made annual treks to the same nesting ground, showing that site fidelity was an...

www.britannica.com

Hadrosaurs evolved resonating chambers that made vocalizations louder.

Crop and Gizzard: Birds have a crop, a specialized pouch in the esophagus used for storing food, and a gizzard, a muscular stomach that grinds food. Dinosaurs did not have these adaptations.

They even ate stones as modern birds do, to make their crops work more efficiently:
The gizzard, also referred to as the ventriculus, gastric mill, and gigerium, is an organ found in the digestive tract of some animals, including archosaurs (birds and other dinosaurs, crocodiles, alligators, pterosaurs), earthworms, some gastropods, some fish, and some crustaceans.

Gizzard - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Preen Gland: Birds have a preen gland that secretes oils used for feather maintenance and waterproofing. Dinosaurs lacked this specialized gland.

Sorry, wrong again:

“If we find more of these lipids, we will be able to better reconstruct the lifestyle of these animals,” said coauthor Jakob Vinther in a statement. “For example, it would be interesting to find out whether feathered dinosaurs, as the ancestors of birds, already possessed uropygial glands and preened their plumages.”

We Now Have Evidence That Birds Preened Their Plumage 48 Million Years Ago

Did feathered dinosaurs do the same?

www.atlasobscura.com

Again, your guy assumed things not in evidence.

Avian Immune System: The avian immune system is distinct from that of dinosaurs, with specialized features such as the bursa of Fabricius, which plays a crucial role in the development of the immune system.

And your evidence that dinosaurs lacked them is...? For years it was thought that dinosaurs didn't have flight feathers, were ectotherms, lacked the "avian" respiratory system and so on. And now we know they had all of those. What you don't know, is a very shaky place on which to stand.

As you see, it's better to rely on the scientific literature to learn about these things. Your source seems profoundly ignorant of dinosaur anatomy and physiology.

 

[Barbarian]

The point to the Good Samaritan was not merely "it's good to help those in need"; it was Jesus telling His people that it's better to emulate a heretic who loves and cares for all people, than to be like a religiously-correct Levite who does not.

Ahhh, so that's the- or a- reason why you seek common worldview ground with the World's view of origins

I can only accept that Jesus is right. You should, too.

Already am

If you were, you'd just accept His word on it. Find a way to do that.

Family-to-family evolution aint the world, in any sense of "world".

It's just God's creation. Why not just accept it on His terms? You won't go to hell for rejecting evolution; He really doesn't care if you approve or not. But don't make an idol of your new doctrines.

In my self-quote, I was referring to "evolution and big bang" in "origins beliefs".

It's a common dodge among creationists. Conflating theories might seem like an easy deception, but it never works.

You'll have to specify which verses were "revised". As you may have learned, that's a pretty serious charge.

Around the turn of the century, the Seventh-Day Adventists, on the visions of a "prophetess" invented YE creationism. It was proselytized to fundamentalists who founded the first YE creationist organizations like the ICR and Creation Research Society.

How can something supposedly "nonfactual" as Genesis (you believe it's allegory)

[/QUOTE]
If you regard God's word as "nonfactual" if He chooses to use allegory in His word, there isn't much I can do to get you to believe Him.

So you don't have a solid answer. You don't want to admit that OEE beliefs are simply compromise with Athiesm.

In fact, Darwin wrote that God just created the first living things.
There is grandeur in this view of life, with its several powers, having been originally breathed by the Creator into a few forms or into one; and that, whilst this planet has gone cycling on according to the fixed law of gravity, from so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been, and are being evolved.
Charles Darwin, last sentence of On the Origin of Species

Doesn't sound like atheism to me. Why deny something so manifestly obvious?

If your claims about "evolution is creation" were true, don't you think Athiests would be hating on evolution

No more than you'd expect them be hating on electricity.

and organizations like AIG would defend it?

AIG accepts the Adventist revision called YE creatinism. Why would they accept evolution?

 

[Barbarian]

Still waiting for how the datings are trustworthy

Precise dating of the destruction of Pompeii proves argon-argon method can reliably date rocks as young as 2,000 years​

08.28.97 - Precise dating of the destruction of Pompeii proves argon-argon method can reliably date rocks as young as 2,000 years

(like outside of shell being dated as older/younger than its inside!)

Mollusks get their carbon from geological sources, not plants. So C14 dating won't work for them. But the second error is to suppose that C14 is used by paleontologists. Did they guys who told you that story know better? They probably did, but they correctly supposed that you didn't.

(claims about "information-conservation" ruling out evolution)
Sounds interesting. Name us one process, required for evolution, that is prohibited by thermodynamics or "information-conservation." What do you have?

(no response; just an attempt to dodge)

But you still can't show us even one process that is required for evolution, that is prohibited by thermodynamics or "information conservation." What's the hold-up?

Can you show us three that are permitted?

All of them are permitted. As you now realize, there isn't even one. They lied to you. Or is it possible you don't even know what processes are required for evolution? Would you like me to show you what they are?

So nothing but "if it takes too long for humans to observe, it must be impossible"?

This is neither YEC's only nor main argument.

It's the one they trot out when all their other objections fail. Behavior is more convincing than talk.

Do you now see why so few scientists and informed Christians take YE seriously?

Because of Athiests, peer pressure, the school system, and the evolution-promoting, but Christ-less (wow big surprise!! not!) culture.

The professor from which I took my first course in evolution, was on the board of vestry for his local church. Don't be so gullible.

So few people, in general, take what the Bible says seriously.

YE creationism is a great atheist-maker. But it's not the only reason. For years, fundamentalist ministers were howling that "race mixing" was against God's law. It's more than just YE creationism, but YE creationism is a major contributor..

(argument that evolution only involves loss and snakes lack genes for limbs)

Snakes have genes for limbs. Some of them even retain vestigial limbs.

This is yet another "loss"

Nope. It's an addition. A gene that suppresses the gene for limbs. Sometimes, as in some adaptations in humans, evolution simplifies things. Sometimes, it adds things.

Ever seen any dinoes with REAL wings, and not just art?

You just showed us one. Parakeet. But here's a really old one:

Microraptor.

And besides, that's clearly a bird and not a dino.

Nope. Dinosaur. Show me one apomorphic character it has that isn't found in other dinosaurs.

 

[KV-44-v1]

Microraptor.

What makes that a dino? Any kid will say "bird" because F2FE is anti-intuitive. F2FE is an artificial belief.

Families stay families even if millions of years were real.

Nope. Dinosaur. Show me one apomorphic character it has that isn't found in other dinosaurs.

Feathers.
You'll assert otherwise, but the best you have is filaments. Which are not feathers.
By evolution logic, hair is also "pre feathers". Anything goes in Darwin Town.

Nope. It's an addition. A gene that suppresses the gene for limbs. Sometimes, as in some adaptations in humans, evolution simplifies things. Sometimes, it adds things.

Did you observe this gene to supress? How do you know for sure that they didn't lose it on their own, with no need for suppressant?

YE creationism is a great atheist-maker. But it's not the only reason. For years,

Show me ONE athiest that believes YEC as fact and preaches such.

fundamentalist ministers were howling that "race mixing" was against God's law.

Well then they were wrong. They shouldve believed Genesis and not evolutionary race myths.

It's more than just YE creationism, but YE creationism is a major contributor..

If your claim was correct, then athiests wouldn't be hating on AnswersinGenesis with such a passion now, would they?
Are athiests divided against themself? If what you say is true then surely they should hate evolution and promote YEC.

 

[Barbarian]

What makes that a dino?

Anatomy.

Main characteristics dinosaurs share:​

• They had an upright stance, with legs perpendicular to their body. This is the main feature that sets dinosaurs apart from other reptiles.
• Like other reptiles, they laid eggs.
• With the exception of some birds, for example penguins, dinosaurs lived on land, not in the sea.
• Their skull had a hole between the eye socket and nostril. This feature is shared by all archosaurs.
• Dinosaurs also had two holes behind the eye socket. Large, strong jaw muscles went through the holes to attach directly to the top of the skull. As a result, the jaws were able to open wide and clamp down with more force.

Diapsid archosaurs. Like birds and other dinosaurs. Microraptor is, like modern birds, a troodontid,the family of bird-like dinosaurs.

Nope. Dinosaur. Show me one apomorphic character it has that isn't found in other dinosaurs.

Feathers.

Sorry, that's wrong. As you now see, the troodontid dinosaur Microraptor had flight feathers. So does Archaeopteryx. So does a number of other troodontids.

So that's out. Try again?

By evolution logic, hair is also "pre feathers".

Nope. To the those who don't know much about it, maybe. But it turns out that one can induce scutes (a particular kind of scale found only in dinosaurs, crocodilians, and birds) to form feathers.

Evo-Devo of feathers and scales: building complex epithelial appendages​

Curr Opin Genet Dev. 2000 Aug; 10(4): 449–456.
The feather is the most complex vertebrate integument appendage ever evolved. How is a flat piece of epidermis transformed into a three level branched structure? Here we present ten complexity levels of integument appendages that correspond to developmental stages of chicken skin and feather precursors recently identified in dinosaur/primitive bird fossils. Cellular and molecular events that convert one complexity level to the next are discussed, including those converting avian foot scales to feathers.

Did you observe this gene to supress? How do you know for sure that they didn't lose it on their own, with no need for suppressant?

Scientist have...

Tiny DNA tweaks made snakes legless​

A change in gene regulation caused this major shape shifting in reptiles The studies may also help settle a longstanding controversy about fossil snakes, some of which have legs to varying degrees. Paleontologists have long tried to squeeze the limbed fossils onto one branch of the family tree with the limbless ones sprouting off from that branch, something that would be expected had limbs been lost only once. But if it didn't take much to lose legs, then it probably didn't take much to re-evolve them. "It could explain the possible reappearance of limbs in some extinct snake lineages," Richardson says.

Why Snakes Don't Have Legs (For Now)​

Snakes used to have legs. Now they have evolved, but the gene to grow limbs still exists.

Snakes Evolved Out of Their Legs—but They Still Have the Gene

Snakes used to have legs. Now they have evolved, but the gene to grow limbs still exists.

www.nationalgeographic.com

YE creationism is a great atheist-maker. But it's not the only reason. For years, fundamentalist ministers were howling that "race mixing" was against God's law. It's more than just YE creationism, but YE creationism is a major contributor..

Show me ONE athiest that believes YEC as fact

YE is why so many people have rejected Christianity. They see such obvious falsehoods and assume that YE creationism is Christianity.

But eventually, by 1994 I was through with young-earth creationISM. Nothing that young-earth creationists had taught me about geology turned out to be true. I took a poll of my ICR graduate friends who have worked in the oil industry. I asked them one question.

“From your oil industry experience, did any fact that you were taught at ICR, which challenged current geological thinking, turn out in the long run to be true?”

That is a very simple question. One man, Steve Robertson, who worked for Shell grew real silent on the phone, sighed and softly said ‘No!’ A very close friend that I had hired at Arco, after hearing the question, exclaimed, “Wait a minute. There has to be one!” But he could not name one. I can not name one. No one else could either. One man I could not reach, to ask that question, had a crisis of faith about two years after coming into the oil industry. I do not know what his spiritual state is now, but he was in bad shape the last time I talked to him.

And being through with creationism, I very nearly became through with Christianity. I was on the very verge of becoming an atheist.

Why I Left Young-Earth Creationism

In memory of Glenn Morton (1950-2020), Peaceful Science is republishing his personal account and testimony of leaving Young-Earth Creationism.

peacefulscience.org

Well then they were wrong. They shouldve believed Genesis and not evolutionary race myths.

As you see, racism is a YE creationist myth. But many, if not most YE creationists now reject the racist foundations of YE creationism.

It's more than just YE creationism, but YE creationism is a major contributor.

If your claim was correct, then athiests wouldn't be hating on AnswersinGenesis with such a passion now, would they?

There are some racist atheists, but I would expect most of them to object to the kind of racism we see expressed by the founders of YE creationism.

Are athiests divided against themself?

In a lot of ways, yes. I think not so much on the question of race.

If what you say is true then surely they should hate evolution and promote YEC.

That wouldn't make much sense, given the racial beliefs of the founders of YEC.